[Ecrit] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-ecrit-ecall-23: (with COMMENT)

"Mirja Kuehlewind" <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Tue, 17 January 2017 13:05 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
X-Original-To: ecrit@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02BC11293E1; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 05:05:10 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: "Mirja Kuehlewind" <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.40.3
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <148465831000.31986.8406297543964675711.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 05:05:10 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ecrit/gsOgn7NKwtvHyP6aXLUuobyqEAQ>
Cc: draft-ietf-ecrit-ecall@ietf.org, allison.mankin@gmail.com, ecrit@ietf.org, ecrit-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: [Ecrit] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_No_Objection_on_draft-?= =?utf-8?q?ietf-ecrit-ecall-23=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?=
X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
List-Id: <ecrit.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ecrit/>
List-Post: <mailto:ecrit@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 13:05:10 -0000

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ecrit-ecall-23: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ecrit-ecall/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Minor comments:
- sec 9.1.1.1: Is there a case where 'received' could be not 'true'. I
mean how can you acknowledge something that you didn't receive?
- I find the wording used saying "This document registers .." (in the
whole document) not fully approrpiate because the main purpose of this
doc is the spcification of the usage of these registrations. I would
propose the following, e.g.
OLD
"This document registers "urn:service:test.sos.ecall" for eCall test
calls."
NEW
"This document specifies "urn:service:test.sos.ecall" for eCall test
calls and registers it in section X."